Is Roberts the best of the three worst choices for Chief Justice?

[Onlooker]

Poll question: Is Roberts the best of the three worst choices for Chief Justice?

[tk2kewl]

1. roberts needs to be kept off the court

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. Arsenic, strychnine, or cyanide. Take your choice.

All should be rejected.

[praxiz]

3. I'm not sure talking about poisoning a supreme court justice is too clever

Even if it's obviously not meant to be taken seriously.

:)

[tk2kewl]

5. I think it's the poising of the court to which he refers

[Dudley_DUright]

7. To be clear, Tierra_y_Libertad is comparing them to poison

not talking about poisoning them, similar to that old saw "Pick your poison".

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. I was referring to the poisen that they represent to nation.

No doubt some Dem senators will be urging us to swallow Roberts as the least distasteful poisen.

[Loge23]

4. none of the above (nt)

[napi21]

6. Be realistic. Shrub is going to nominate a Pub judge!

I was just reminded this morning about the others that were on his short list along with Roberts! Remember Liddig, Edith Jones, Edith Clement, and those two NEW Circuit court women were all so afraid of? All of those are much worse than Roberts!

Who were you hoping Shrub would name? Olympia Snow or Susan Collins???

There are still a lot of unknown things about Roberts, and that at least means he COULD be more moderate than ome think.

[PATRICK]

9. For what he is put there for

I think it is a toss up between him and Scalia, but I bet a direct crony not a mere ideological stooge, Roberts is a Bush toy puppet somehow. If that is the case he is the worst unless the Bush gang goes up in smoke without Roberts being able to help.

They are all repugnant. The Dems should have gotten tough long ago and said no to all Bush appointees. If anyone has NOT been bad, it was an accident or a horror yet to be revealed.

Now does it matter? We are looking to influence a few wavering Republicans not arguing the party position, whose slightest weakness or collaboration makes any GOP defection a noble suicide which most of them are quite incapable of.

[marions ghost]

10. won't Scalia and Thomas

feel they were in line for chief justice over Roberts? What's going on there...?

[Shipwack]

11. That is odd...

Roberts has only been a judge for two years!!! And now he's going to be the supreme judge in the land. At least Scalia and Thomas, as distasteful as they are, have expereince in the job.

I choose Scalia because at least he is competant enough to voice an opinion, no matter how much I disagree with it. Thomas has rarely opened his mouth on anything, rarely comments on anything, and tends to rubber stamp whatever the other conservatives come up with.

[bullimiami]

12. seems like this move is sure to make scalia and thomas mad at their

evil little emporer.

scalia for sure had to be thinking this was going to be his job.


roberts is a BFEE stooge. life long. thats the whole reason he was nominated to the courts to begin with.

[Mugsy]

13. The thought of Thomas or Scalia makes me shudder.

The thought of Thomas or Scalia appointed to Chief Justice makes me shudder.

[DefenseLawyer]

14. Roberts replacing Rehnquist is better than replacing O'Connor

Rehnquist was the devil, so no matter how bad Roberts votes he can't vote any worse than the devil, so it is a wash. It then leaves the opportunity, albeit a slim one, that Bush will nominate someone more moderate to replace O'Connor. Certainly as the poll numbers tank, the Dems will be able to skim off more and more skittish moderate Republicans to force a more moderate nominee. It may of course be putting off the inevitable shift to the far right if he now nominates a Scalia clone to replace O'Connor, but at least temporarily this has to be seen as a good development.

[chicagiana]

15. Once again, Dems are being setup ...

The Democrats are being set up for a FILIBUSTER fight. He is baiting them to filibuster the Roberts nomination on the basis that he is not a Supreme Court juror, hence unqualified for the chief justice position. Than we will have all the "Justice Sunday" crap all over again and likely distraction away from real issues like the Plame affair and Bush's intentional drowning of New Orleans.

My advice is to simply criticize the nomination, make it part of a larger pattern of appointing people who are WOEFULLY unqualified (tie in with FEMA chief Mike Brown) and simply vote AGAINST the nomination. No filibusters.

If the Democrats filibuster, after the smoke clears Bush will retract the nomination and appoint Clarence Thomas opening up another 5 months of debate over something we can't do anything about.

The IMPEACHMENT recall election of 2006 (elcting people who will impeach Bush) should be the priority. Anything that inteferes with that should be set to the side.